Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Talked to the FIL about primers. A few months ago I wrote that he had gone to a gun show in MT and there was a vendor from CA selling primers by the flat (5000). We pretty much decided at that point that the run on ammo and components really was coming to a conclusion and supply lines were starting to flow again.

Last weekend he went to the show again and the same vendor was there. This time selling only by the brick (1000) and even though he was part of the initial crowd in the door, they only had 3000 Large Pistol primers.

It would seem that the Governator signing the absolutely insane ammo and accessories restrictions / regulation in CA has started another run on ammo and components. CA shooters stocking up before the ban takes effect and makes getting ammo a huge pain in the rear in CA. I am sure the black market ammo pipeline will blossom soon. Unfortunately, this run by CA shooters is making it hard on teh rest of the country again. I just hope people all over don't think this is another EOTWaWKi and start another run on ammo and components nation wide.

I suspect as many others do, that the next step will be to crack down on "Illicit Ammo Manufacturers" as reloaders will be referred to soon.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

I covered the vote and lawsuit filed to keep the red light cameras going here in my previous post. Last night the city council voted unanimously to terminate the contract with ATS and have the City Manager give the required 60 day notice. So, regardless of the outcome of the lawsuit, the cameras are going away.

But Geek. you say, how can that be a bad thing?

The lawyer for the two "Concerned Citizens" who filed the suit made a statement after the city council meeting that the lawsuit is continuing because there are bigger issues at stake. His reasoning was that if someone got a ticket for speeding or turning left on a red light, they could just file a petition to have that part of city code invalidated.

WHAT. AN. IDIOT!

1) Running a red light is a violation of the Texas Motor Vehicle Code. Not a city ordinance.2) The issuance of a civil violation from camera footage is in city code but the majority of voters said NO MORE!3) Speeding and turning left on a red light (running a red light) is also a violation of Texas Motor Vehicle Code. No citizen petition putting a vote in a city election will invalidate these.

Thursday, November 12, 2009

So, many months ago, the city of College Station decided to install red light cameras. Much controversy followed. Administered by American Traffic Solutions the city got a portion of the extortion collected in return for letting ATS thugs terrorize citizens and visitors alike. The intersections chosen for the cameras where not the ones with the highest rates of red light related collisions but were high traffic areas.

During the last legislative session, the Texas Leg sought to ban them from the state. Part of the proposed legislation was that existing systems were grandfathered in for the length of their existing contracts. City of CS signed a new contract with ATS for not only an extended period but for more cameras as well.

Citizens rise up and a petition is organized. They guy behind it got a lawyer to write up the petition based on the city charter to make sure it would be legal and cross all the T's and dot all the I's. In only a few days there were more than enough signatures to force the issue on the ballot.

City lawyers rewrite the wording of the petition for the ballot to rename it a referendum. According to city charter, a referendum on a new law MUST be filed withing 60 days of the new law taking effect. The petition was specifically worded to be a ballot initiative not a referendum to prevent this argument. The city was called on this and the wording was changed back to what it was supposed to be according to the petition.

Election is held and as has been held in every other location where red light cameras have come up for a public vote, the initiative passed banning red light cameras.

Did I mention the theKeep our streets safe PAC" was totally funded by ATS? Or that the coalition to ban the cameras was completely funded by local concerned citizens?

So, when the cameras where supposed to be turned off yesterday, they weren't! Two concerned citizens filed suit in district court to nullify the election based on it being a referendum and beyond 60 days and got a temporary restraining order preventing the city from turning the cameras off. The city attorney only half halfheartedly presented any kind of defense to the suit and the attorney for the petition organizer had to pick up the slack.

If I didn't know any better, I would say the city doesn't want to give up the cameras and is doing everything they can to force them on the people despite the majority who voted to take them down.

We won't even get into the lack of right to appeal the citations or the efficacy of red light camera's in general.

The sheer gall of the city council to thwart the will of the people at every turn and do all they can to subvert the effort to remove these cameras and keep the revenue stream open to ATS and the City.

Friday, November 6, 2009

I'll keep this simple. There were warning signs all over the shooter and the Army ignored them. Maybe for political correctness maybe out of incompetence. How do you get promoted after poor reviews and being ordered to counseling for anti war/Army/US rantings?

The money quote though is from an Spc who worked at the center.

"Overseas you are ready for it. But here you can't even defend yourself."

That right there covers it all. We trust these fine men and women to defend our country and to help bring freedom and democracy to the rest of the world, but we don't trust them with the same tools to protect themselves here at home?

Maybe I'm just a stupid redneck bitterly clinging to my God and Guns but there is much about this whole situation that I just can't seem to understand.